Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I am a human that supports equal rights. And can write.
You are a human that doesn't. And can't.

Naw your a troll. See ya later dippy. Don't mind the banging in your head, I got some guys building a garage.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>From a legal perspective, your soaking wet

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>Naw your a troll. See ya later dippy. Don't mind the banging in your head, I got some guys building a garage.

I bet your job that you have to run off to now is very menial and low paying. Dumb labor is cheap. You should have stayed in school.

I'm not being rude, you're just insignificant.

[Nugent lost]

Ted Nugent amounts to a hill of beans, all gas and no action.

[Big D]

Nugent lost wrote:

Ted Nugent amounts to a hill of beans, all gas and no action.

Don’t be so mean, consider contributing to the Ted Nugent charity….... the Ted Nugent suicide watch/legal defence fund

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
Why are you whining to Pietro? He's not a hypocrite like you who supports marriage equality for only people you approve of and denies it to everyone else.
He's consistent. You're not because you are a bigot, and very stupid.
Hope that helps!

He asked, dumbazz

[Jazybird58]

Frankie RIzzo wrote:

<quoted text>
I bet your job that you have to run off to now is very menial and low paying. Dumb labor is cheap. You should have stayed in school.
I'm not being rude, you're just insignificant.

Why are you so pissed?

[Pietro Armando]

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>who?

Is on first.

[Anonymous]

recount

[Pietro Armando]

DorN wrote:

Straight parents do produce gay offspring.
They want their sons or daughts to be able to marry the person of their choice.

That's fine, marry who they wish, however it does not mean society has to legally redefine marriage for them.

[Pietro Armando]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>Gawdd you people really are clueless. Do single couples have the same rights and privileges of marries couples?

Of course not, silly rabbit.

How about married couples VRS Civil Unions???
Lets see if YOU can find out.
How about this. A gay couple, been together for 25 years. One is involved in a horrific auto crash, leaves him brain dead, can the other ask to have the plug pulled?????( If he is even allowed in the room)
Income tax, wills, probate, the list is quite extensive

Perhaps it is.....issues that can be resolved without redefining marriage.

[Big D]

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Of course not, silly rabbit.
<quoted text>
Perhaps it is.....issues that can be resolved without redefining marriage.

Excellent suggestion, we could strike the word "marriage" from all government and legal use, and everyone can have a civil unions, legally defined however they want ( would even include Frankie's obsession ), and if they want to call it "marriage" that is just a personal preference.

Works for me, that way every individual little church could define “marriage” for their own little followers and it will have no legal significance.

[Neil Andblowme]

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
That's fine, marry who they wish, however it does not mean society has to legally redefine marriage for them.

Aren't you whining for a "redefinition" for polygamy?

[Neil Andblowme]

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Of course not, silly rabbit.
<quoted text>
Perhaps it is.....issues that can be resolved without redefining marriage.

Let me guess.... does it involve waving a magic wand?

[Neil Andblowme]

Pietro Armando wrote:

<quoted text>
Is on first.

Nobody

[Pietro Armando]

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>Nobody

"Who's" on first, "What's" on second,....

[Nugent lost]

Did you see that yellow bellied ted nugent running down the road?

[Pietro Armando]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy_in_No...

Neil Andblowme wrote:

<quoted text>
Aren't you whining for a "redefinition" for polygamy?

Is it really redefining it?

Polygamy in the United States has a long history. Many Native American tribes practiced polygamy (generally polygyny)[7] and European mountain men often took native wives and adopted the practice.[8] Some tribes seem to have continued the practice into the 20th century.[8]

Scots-Irish settlers, and some Welsh emigrants, carried long-standing multiple partner traditions to the Americas from Europe.[8] Utopian and communal groups established during the mid-19th century had varying marriage systems, including group marriage and polygyny.(Loue, pp. 27–30) There is also some evidence in the American South for multiple marriage partners, particularly after the Civil War.[8]

Polygamy has also been practiced, discreetly, by some Muslims living in America.[9]

Christian polygamy is a more modern development of a polygamist culture.[10][11] They assert that the movement has no connection with Joseph Smith.

Because polygamy has been illegal throughout the United States since the mid-19th century, and in many individual states before that, sources on alternative marriage practices are limited. Consequently, it is difficult to get a clear picture of the extent of the practice in the past and at the present time.

[Nugent lost]

Some one give Ted Nugent bus-fare to get his sorry behind back home on his stuupid ranch.

[Frankie RIzzo]

Jazybird58 wrote:

<quoted text>Why are you so pissed?

I'm not. Why are you so stupid?